[Oslc-Automation] Issues to close/discuss at next meeting (was: action items from today's meeting all done)

[John Arwe]

1-4: fine
5: suggest you assign Anamitra to do that, since it's really his scenario 
and email.
6: now live, so you're free to approve if this provides enough review 
time.
7.1: the type list is correct; read the context, which is about linkage 
from inside resource shapes, and I see zero reason to introduce a new 
dependency on the automation vocabulary.  This does not conflict with 
Automation specifying an additional context (off of Auto Plans) that has 
different rules, right?
7.2: messy/promises all live now, ala 6
8: or, say that once the notice that the updates are live goes out either 
via the mailing list or in a mtg, people have n weeks (strawman: n=2) to 
object and propose an alternative, or the issue will be considered closed. 
 "closing" an issue doesn't really have super-special significance, given 
that anyone is free at any time to say "hey, that's wrong!" via a new 
issue.
9: I suggest 8 instead; add that as the policy stmt on the page if you 
like; it wasn't an accident that I failed to replicate all the grand 
complexity of the states used by other WGs; I just recognized that in 
practical terms the ones I left out are "never" used so I KISSed it.

wrt this week vs this week for next meeting:
- tomorrow, I have a first half conflict, *but* I also raised and/or fixed 
many of the issues in question so I wouldn't really have anything add 
unless there are questions.  my "votes" are above anyway.
- next week, my calendar says I'm out.  I suspect that matches my flights, 
but it's conceivable but unlikely that there's a mismatch and I could 
attend.

Best Regards, John

Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages
Cloud and Smarter Infrastructure OSLC Lead

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-automation_open-services.net/attachments/20140730/4052c0e4/attachment-0003.html>